It is probable that DM genuinely believes in reincarnation. If so we should expect him to have a plan for the return of LRH.
What might that be?
There are three possibilities.
a) Kill him.
b) Hand over power to him.
c) Imprison him. This is the most likely as simply killing him would allow him to come right back. Keeping the boy LRH locked up and feeding him a diet of drugs and hypnosis would be better. In this way DM might hope to degrade him to the point he was not a threat.
Richard Ford <doorman.f...@googlemail.com> wrote: > It is probable that DM genuinely believes in reincarnation. If so we > should expect him to have a plan for the return of LRH.
> What might that be?
> There are three possibilities.
> a) Kill him.
> b) Hand over power to him.
> c) Imprison him. This is the most likely as simply killing him would > allow him to come right back. Keeping the boy LRH locked up and > feeding him a diet of drugs and hypnosis would be better. In this way > DM might hope to degrade him to the point he was not a threat.
> Just a thought.
Are you seriously delusional enough to believe that the evil dwarf would have any method whatsoever of recognizing any reincarnated person, much less interacting?
> In article > <9983af70-1f93-45e5-8d35-c158cdde6...@a31g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, > Richard Ford <doorman.f...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> It is probable that DM genuinely believes in reincarnation. If so we >> should expect him to have a plan for the return of LRH.
>> What might that be?
>> There are three possibilities.
>> a) Kill him.
>> b) Hand over power to him.
>> c) Imprison him. This is the most likely as simply killing him would >> allow him to come right back. Keeping the boy LRH locked up and >> feeding him a diet of drugs and hypnosis would be better. In this way >> DM might hope to degrade him to the point he was not a threat.
>> Just a thought.
> Are you seriously delusional enough to believe that the evil dwarf > would have any method whatsoever of recognizing any reincarnated > person, much less interacting?
The DM is himself not delusional: he knows how to imitate the main qualities of his criminal guru: committing crimes, st§ealing people, blackmailing them, sending spies, buying the enemies with a "500 dollars severance" after 30 years as a slave, etc..
> It is probable that DM genuinely believes in reincarnation. If so we > should expect him to have a plan for the return of LRH.
> What might that be?
> There are three possibilities.
> a) Kill him.
> b) Hand over power to him.
> c) Imprison him. This is the most likely as simply killing him would > allow him to come right back. Keeping the boy LRH locked up and > feeding him a diet of drugs and hypnosis would be better. In this way > DM might hope to degrade him to the point he was not a threat.
> Just a thought.
DM KNOWS it is all a scam. That is why he jumped in the moment Hubturd died and got rid off everyone that knew about Hubturd's last will. DM saw a splendid opportunity to take over the scam and made it to his own personal property. It might even be that DM had something to do with Hubturd's death, but that is speculation. DM also KNOWS this whole reincarnation shit is bogus. So he knows Hubturd is dead and will stay dead for eternity.
Peter
"What is it about Scientology that the leader of Scientology couldn't have these flaws addressed? Seriously. If this is the modern science of mental health, if this is the salvation of mankind, why is the leader of Scientology a petty little dictator?" - Mark Bunker
> It is probable that DM genuinely believes in reincarnation. If so we > should expect him to have a plan for the return of LRH.
> What might that be?
> There are three possibilities.
> a) Kill him.
> b) Hand over power to him.
> c) Imprison him. This is the most likely as simply killing him would > allow him to come right back. Keeping the boy LRH locked up and > feeding him a diet of drugs and hypnosis would be better. In this way > DM might hope to degrade him to the point he was not a threat.
> Just a thought.
You forgot to list the most obvious thing:
DM would simply slap the reincarnated LRH until he started crying and blows Scientology in a huff. (And if he couldn't get the job done himself he might hire his old partner in crime, Marty Rathbun, to give him a hand.)
<xenufra...@free.fr> wrote: > "Skipper" <skipSPAMpr...@yahoo.not> a écrit dans le message de news: > 031120092234544877%skipSPAMpr...@yahoo.not... > > In article > > <9983af70-1f93-45e5-8d35-c158cdde6...@a31g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, > > Richard Ford <doorman.f...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >> It is probable that DM genuinely believes in reincarnation. If so we > >> should expect him to have a plan for the return of LRH.
> >> What might that be?
> >> There are three possibilities.
> >> a) Kill him.
> >> b) Hand over power to him.
> >> c) Imprison him. This is the most likely as simply killing him would > >> allow him to come right back. Keeping the boy LRH locked up and > >> feeding him a diet of drugs and hypnosis would be better. In this way > >> DM might hope to degrade him to the point he was not a threat.
> >> Just a thought.
> > Are you seriously delusional enough to believe that the evil dwarf > > would have any method whatsoever of recognizing any reincarnated > > person, much less interacting?
> The DM is himself not delusional: he knows how to imitate the main qualities > of his criminal guru: committing crimes, st§ealing people, blackmailing > them, sending spies, buying the enemies with a "500 dollars severance" after > 30 years as a slave, etc..
> r
Oh, you mean he doesn't really BELIEVE all those lies he tells people? Thanks for clearing that up. LOL
On Nov 3, 11:17 pm, Richard Ford <doorman.f...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> It is probable that DM genuinely believes in reincarnation. If so we > should expect him to have a plan for the return of LRH.
> What might that be?
Their preparations seem to suggest, their short term plan is for him to have a good sit down at one or more desks, and resume smoking. Then, they'll decide what to do from there.
In article <7b7744ab-bca7-40f0-bb0c-e6db2e8b9...@s21g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
Astrid <Astrid7777...@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Nov 3, 11:17 pm, Richard Ford <doorman.f...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > It is probable that DM genuinely believes in reincarnation. If so we > > should expect him to have a plan for the return of LRH.
> > What might that be?
> Their preparations seem to suggest, their short term plan is for him > to have a good sit down at one or more desks, and resume smoking. > Then, they'll decide what to do from there.
On Nov 3, 11:34 pm, Skipper <skipSPAMpr...@yahoo.not> wrote:
> Are you seriously delusional enough to believe that the evil dwarf > would have any method whatsoever of recognizing any reincarnated > person, much less interacting?
The reincarnation of LRH will be recognizable to those with knowingness. He will talk without his lips touching, and he'll ask for an audience with Suri Cruise, upon which she will present her architectural plans for the Space Org at the central plaza in Bulgravia for the billion year galactic Reich. Hip hip hurray!
On Nov 4, 11:47 am, Astrid <Astrid7777...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Nov 3, 11:17 pm, Richard Ford <doorman.f...@googlemail.com> wrote:> It is probable that DM genuinely believes in reincarnation. If so we > > should expect him to have a plan for the return of LRH.
> > What might that be?
> Their preparations seem to suggest, their short term plan is for him > to have a good sit down at one or more desks, and resume smoking. > Then, they'll decide what to do from there.
I remember when my oldest son, who was born a few months after Hub popped his last balloon, and I laughed about the possibility of him dying his hair red, storming into Flag bellowing orders and insisting he was 'back' ... and really pissed off.
> Are you seriously delusional enough to believe that the evil dwarf > would have any method whatsoever of recognizing any reincarnated > person, much less interacting?
The reincarnation of LRH will be recognizable to those with knowingness. He will talk without his lips touching, and he'll ask for an audience with Suri Cruise, upon which she will present her architectural plans for the Space Org at the central plaza in Bulgravia for the billion year galactic Reich. Hip hip hurray!
On Nov 4, 12:17 am, Richard Ford <doorman.f...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> It
DM is not the heir of Scientology. If L. Ron Hubbard would come back, he would say that DM took SCN over without his permission.
If L. Ron Hubbard would enter any Scientology org today, saying that he is back, they would route him out with security.
Scientology orgs are now like Christian churches, saying waiting for Jesus but who would routed in a mental institution if entering a Christian church and having the guts to state it.
DM is not the heir of Scientology. If L. Ron Hubbard would come back, he would say that DM took SCN over without his permission.
If L. Ron Hubbard would enter any Scientology org today, saying that he is back, they would route him out with security.
Scientology orgs are now like Christian churches, saying waiting for Jesus but who would routed in a mental institution if entering a Christian church and having the guts to state it.
This planet is so dumb!
Barbara Schwarz
========================================
[REPLY]
No, Barbara, you're the dumb one. The size of your ego is only exceeded by the size of your feet.
Unlike the lies and phony teaching in Scientology, Christianity is based upon a factual man who is the Son of God who really lived and who really did the things He said He was going to do. Jesus told us while He was yet alive that he would be crucified, die and then come back to life on the third day - and He did just that.
Where is your precious Hubbard who seems to have claimed he would be coming back in another body? Huh, huh? I can't hear you, Barbara. What a fraud he turned out to be. . .
The only dumb people are those who are so dumb or so arrogant that they refuse to believe historical fact and believe in quacks instead.
By their deeds shall they be known. If Jesus were to come back today, all He would have to do is one small miracle and that would be proof that He really was who He said He was. God does miracles - nobody else. Jesus is God.
> DM is not the heir of Scientology. If L. Ron Hubbard would come back, > he would say that DM took SCN over without his permission.
> If L. Ron Hubbard would enter any Scientology org today, saying that > he is back, they would route him out with security.
> Scientology orgs are now like Christian churches, saying waiting for > Jesus but who would routed in a mental institution if entering a > Christian church and having the guts to state it.
> This planet is so dumb!
> Barbara Schwarz
> ========================================
> [REPLY]
> No, Barbara, you're the dumb one. The size of your ego is only exceeded by > the size of your feet.
> Unlike the lies and phony teaching in Scientology, Christianity is based > upon a factual man who is the Son of God who really lived and who really did > the things He said He was going to do. Jesus told us while He was yet alive > that he would be crucified, die and then come back to life on the third > day - and He did just that.
> Where is your precious Hubbard who seems to have claimed he would be coming > back in another body? Huh, huh? I can't hear you, Barbara. What a fraud he > turned out to be. . .
> The only dumb people are those who are so dumb or so arrogant that they > refuse to believe historical fact and believe in quacks instead.
> By their deeds shall they be known. If Jesus were to come back today, all He > would have to do is one small miracle and that would be proof that He really > was who He said He was. God does miracles - nobody else. Jesus is God.
i dont mean to antagonize, but there are reasonable doubts among historians (non-religious ones) about the factual existance of Jesus since the "New Testiment" is the ONLY record of his existence and can hardly be called impartial. Beyond that there is NO evidence of his existence - the Shroud of Turin was found to be much younger than Jesus (by more than a 1000 years ) And that Bible its self has been used by Christian cults to control people ever since through editing, omission and mistranslation. The historic Jesus, if there ever was one, is lost to history. As is any reliable record of what he actually did that wasnt rewritten by popes and kings. I'm really uncomfortable with discussions of "my cult can beat up your cult" it makes both sides look like propagandists and does little to help with lasting dissemination efforts or either side.
Why not just draw distinctions between the two... like pointing out the values of Christianity that are universal to all - not just people in the Christian bubble - and point out where the cult of Scientology fails to uphold such UNIVERSAL truths. You get a two-for in that on one hand you refute the erroneous teachings and philosophy of Sientology while strengthening your position by not coming across as pushing your religion in an offensive way. It makes Christianity look good while making Scientology look bad. If you just push your trip down another person's throat, you just turn them off and likely prevent them from ever possibly becomming a Christian in the future. And then - from your point of view - you are partly responsible for that persons suffering that comes from a non-Christian life because you pushed them away.
There's a fine line between effective dissemination and bully prosteletizing (sp?) that can often be the difference between someone joining or not.
-again I don't mean to belittle your position, I respect your religion and your right to practice and spread it. I just don't share your faith. - I feel, however that I must clarify that I have great respect for the figure of Jesus as a teacher. Whether he actually lived or not is rather beside the point since the teachings endure regardless and would continue to inspire folks such as yourself to live better lives. And that is never a bad thing.
>> DM is not the heir of Scientology. If L. Ron Hubbard would come back, >> he would say that DM took SCN over without his permission.
>> If L. Ron Hubbard would enter any Scientology org today, saying that >> he is back, they would route him out with security.
>> Scientology orgs are now like Christian churches, saying waiting for >> Jesus but who would routed in a mental institution if entering a >> Christian church and having the guts to state it.
>> This planet is so dumb!
>> Barbara Schwarz
>> ========================================
>> [REPLY]
>> No, Barbara, you're the dumb one. The size of your ego is only exceeded >> by >> the size of your feet.
>> Unlike the lies and phony teaching in Scientology, Christianity is based >> upon a factual man who is the Son of God who really lived and who really >> did >> the things He said He was going to do. Jesus told us while He was yet >> alive >> that he would be crucified, die and then come back to life on the third >> day - and He did just that.
>> Where is your precious Hubbard who seems to have claimed he would be >> coming >> back in another body? Huh, huh? I can't hear you, Barbara. What a fraud >> he >> turned out to be. . .
>> The only dumb people are those who are so dumb or so arrogant that they >> refuse to believe historical fact and believe in quacks instead.
>> By their deeds shall they be known. If Jesus were to come back today, all >> He >> would have to do is one small miracle and that would be proof that He >> really >> was who He said He was. God does miracles - nobody else. Jesus is God.
> i dont mean to antagonize, but there are reasonable doubts among > historians (non-religious ones) about the factual existance of Jesus since > the "New Testiment" is the ONLY record of his existence and can hardly be > called impartial. Beyond that there is NO evidence of his existence - the > Shroud of Turin was found to be much younger than Jesus (by more than a > 1000 years ) And that Bible its self has been used by Christian cults to > control people ever since through editing, omission and mistranslation. > The historic Jesus, if there ever was one, is lost to history. As is any > reliable record of what he actually did that wasnt rewritten by popes and > kings. I'm really uncomfortable with discussions of "my cult can beat up > your cult" it makes both sides look like propagandists and does little to > help with lasting dissemination efforts or either side.
> Why not just draw distinctions between the two... like pointing out the > values of Christianity that are universal to all - not just people in the > Christian bubble - and point out where the cult of Scientology fails to > uphold such UNIVERSAL truths. You get a two-for in that on one hand you > refute the erroneous teachings and philosophy of Sientology while > strengthening your position by not coming across as pushing your religion > in an offensive way. It makes Christianity look good while making > Scientology look bad. If you just push your trip down another person's > throat, you just turn them off and likely prevent them from ever possibly > becomming a Christian in the future. And then - from your point of view - > you are partly responsible for that persons suffering that comes from a > non-Christian life because you pushed them away.
> There's a fine line between effective dissemination and bully > prosteletizing (sp?) that can often be the difference between someone > joining or not.
> -again I don't mean to belittle your position, I respect your religion and > your right to practice and spread it. I just don't share your faith. - I > feel, however that I must clarify that I have great respect for the figure > of Jesus as a teacher. Whether he actually lived or not is rather beside > the point since the teachings endure regardless and would continue to > inspire folks such as yourself to live better lives. And that is never a > bad thing.
You should read "Mere Christianity" by C.S. Lewis who was an agnostic before he turned Christian. He makes a very valid argument of how and why it is insulting to claim Jesus was only a 'teacher.' He also makes a very good argument for the historical accuracy of the life and times of Jesus Christ - a real man and a real historical figure.
Historical records have a long and accurate record never having been written down on paper. Such records have a long tradition of being passed orally from generation to generation with great accuracy. In Jesus Christ's case, it is generally believed that his history was written down within 200 or so years of his life. This is only four generations and great accuracy can be assumed due to the relatively short period of oral transmission of that history.
It's not at all insulting to assert that Jesus was a teacher. To me thats what he was. In order for him to be more - to me - I would have to convert to your religion. I won't do that. You might try being a little less "my way or the ighway" about it. CS Lewis, with all due respect was not a scientist or historian.
Christianity has a terrible track record in keeping their teachings unchanged. it may be belived that stuff was written down 200 years after his death, but there is no writings that date to that time, so it's only speculation. (not to say their wrong, we just don't know) And that's all it is with the historical Jesus. Speculation. Again, not saying it was wrong so much as to say it requires faith in the absence of actual evidence. Not to say that within my own religion there is a lot of disagreement about the historical nature of the Buddha. But, in a similar fashion, it doesnt really matter if they were real or not - I personally believe that both of them were - But the fact that the teachings are still studied and applied is what counts. I dare say tho that Christianity's writings have been squirreled (to borrow a word) more than Buddhism. The difference being that there is no pretense that the writings that came along after his death and expanded upon the original ideas were infact written by the Buddha himself. So even though the Lotus sutra says, "The Buddha said ...." we know that in fact the historical Buddha did not say those things but rather those "quotes" are OF the Buddha - being consistent with his teaching. A mechanism for modernaization was built in where it was written that the teaching would in fact have to be updated for people as the times changed. (L. Ron tried at one point to use this fact to claim he was the Buddha Meitreya) The problem with the Bible is that when it gets squirreled, no one admits that they've done it. they all claim it's the original. Thats a problem for me personally.
I don't want to pick a fight with anyone about the relative merits of Buddhism to Christianity because if you strip away the mythology of either religion their teachings about how to live one's life are almost identical. I like to say that if Shakyamuni Buddha and Jesus had met along the side of a road, they would have made a campfire and stayed up all night comparing notes and becomming best friends. I really believe that. Like I said, I respect others relgions by not trying to convince them that they're wrong and that Buddhism is the ONLY way. That would be rude and counter-productive. Rather it's my "job" to show others how much in common we all have even though our myths may be very different. In that way I can show you that you can be assured of my attaining happiness on my chosen path as I am sure that you will attain happiness along your chosen path. It's not true of all Christians but I find myself stuggling with a lot of intolerance to the possibility that there is another way to find happiness than Christianity. It can be frustrating since I don't express that type of intolerance on them.
> DM is not the heir of Scientology. If L. Ron Hubbard would come back, > he would say that DM took SCN over without his permission.
> If L. Ron Hubbard would enter any Scientology org today, saying that > he is back, they would route him out with security.
> Scientology orgs are now like Christian churches, saying waiting for > Jesus but who would routed in a mental institution if entering a > Christian church and having the guts to state it.
> This planet is so dumb!
> Barbara Schwarz
> ========================================
> [REPLY]
> No, Barbara, you're the dumb one. The size of your ego is only exceeded by > the size of your feet.
> Unlike the lies and phony teaching in Scientology, Christianity is based > upon a factual man who is the Son of God who really lived and who really did > the things He said He was going to do. Jesus told us while He was yet alive > that he would be crucified, die and then come back to life on the third > day - and He did just that.
> Where is your precious Hubbard who seems to have claimed he would be coming > back in another body? Huh, huh? I can't hear you, Barbara. What a fraud he > turned out to be. . .
> The only dumb people are those who are so dumb or so arrogant that they > refuse to believe historical fact and believe in quacks instead.
> By their deeds shall they be known. If Jesus were to come back today, all He > would have to do is one small miracle and that would be proof that He really > was who He said He was. God does miracles - nobody else. Jesus is God.
> -- > Gregory Hall
I ignore all your hateful Christian remarks. But if you think that God and Jesus want a hateful person like you with them in paradise, you are very much mistaken, Neal.
Jesus died at the cross because was unable to undo all the people at one who came for at the same time. Jesus was OT but also an OT can get in troubles while having a body.
Jesus was killed.
And now, we live in a technical world where any person is screened already at birth by secret services and implanted. It happens to anybody with a body and it includes Jesus and L. Ron Hubbard.
They are still better and more able than anybody else but when technicans have more access to your subconscious mind than yourself and bombard it with secret tapes full of commands to restrict OT abilities, it is also hard for an OT to fly.
In other words, Jesus is still better than others but not spared by your case officers, Neal. Many of the abilities by Jesus' are paralized because of these silent sound tapes that they play to the mind of Jesus.
The miracle that you are waiting for is to defeat what they do to the mind of anybody who has a body. If that is done, Jesus can do all the miracles again and will fly your boat and throw you overboard for all the mean things you did to me.
Once again: if L. Ron Hubbard enters a C of S today and says he is Ron, they call security and kick him out.
If Jesus enters a Christian Church today, they stuff Jesus in a mental institution.
Jesus can't do these miracles anymore because Jesus' abilities are under wraps by the SEGNPMSS because of thousands and thousands of tapes with commands that play in Jesus' subconscious mind and stop Jesus from flying and doing all the miracles that Jesus was known for.
If Jesus would have been invincable, Jesus would have never been cruzified as Jesus would have transformed the cruzifiers otherwise into harmless teddy bears.
L. Ron Hubbard has the same problems as Jesus. Stolen and controlled abilities. But they will emerge, despite your scorn and evilness. However, they will not let you get away with whatever mean things you are doing.
On Nov 7, 5:12 pm, slobeck <polymorp...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> It's
Certain people who studied Jesus and are not sexists like Neal say that Jesus was a woman. All that Jesus said and did was typical for a woman to do. Let the children come to me, etc. There is so much to it that indicates that the bible was rewritten by sexists and they turned God's daughter into God's son and the cruzification was not just a cruzification but also rape.
The Christian church "cleaned" the bible up so to speak by only more reporting the cruzification but not also the rape.
Interesting also if you speak out the name Jesus. There is a She in it. Shesus.
And now Neal, the sexist wants to be salvaged by her...
> not at all insulting to assert that Jesus was a teacher. To me > thats what he was. In order for him to be more - to me - I would have > to convert to your religion. I won't do that. You might try being a > little less "my way or the ighway" about it. CS Lewis, with all due > respect was not a scientist or historian.
> Christianity has a terrible track record in keeping their teachings > unchanged. it may be belived that stuff was written down 200 years > after his death, but there is no writings that date to that time, so > it's only speculation. (not to say their wrong, we just don't know) > And that's all it is with the historical Jesus. Speculation. Again, not > saying it was wrong so much as to say it requires faith in the absence > of actual evidence. Not to say that within my own religion there is a > lot of disagreement about the historical nature of the Buddha. But, in > a similar fashion, it doesnt really matter if they were real or not - I > personally believe that both of them were - But the fact that the > teachings are still studied and applied is what counts. I dare say tho > that Christianity's writings have been squirreled (to borrow a word) > more than Buddhism. The difference being that there is no pretense > that the writings that came along after his death and expanded upon the > original ideas were infact written by the Buddha himself. So even > though the Lotus sutra says, "The Buddha said ...." we know that in > fact the historical Buddha did not say those things but rather those > "quotes" are OF the Buddha - being consistent with his teaching. A > mechanism for modernaization was built in where it was written that the > teaching would in fact have to be updated for people as the times > changed. (L. Ron tried at one point to use this fact to claim he was > the Buddha Meitreya) The problem with the Bible is that when it gets > squirreled, no one admits that they've done it. they all claim it's the > original. Thats a problem for me personally.
> I don't want to pick a fight with anyone about the relative merits of > Buddhism to Christianity because if you strip away the mythology of > either religion their teachings about how to live one's life are almost > identical. I like to say that if Shakyamuni Buddha and Jesus had met > along the side of a road, they would have made a campfire and stayed up > all night comparing notes and becomming best friends. I really believe > that. Like I said, I respect others relgions by not trying to convince > them that they're wrong and that Buddhism is the ONLY way. That would > be rude and counter-productive. Rather it's my "job" to show others how > much in common we all have even though our myths may be very different. > In that way I can show you that you can be assured of my attaining > happiness on my chosen path as I am sure that you will attain happiness > along your chosen path. It's not true of all Christians but I find > myself stuggling with a lot of intolerance to the possibility that > there is another way to find happiness than Christianity. It can be > frustrating since I don't express that type of intolerance on them.
On Nov 4, 12:17 am, Richard Ford <doorman.f...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> It
L. Ron Hubbard was kidnapped to Germany and given to a German family just as they did with me. His memory was stolen just as they stole mine.
As the German secret service altered Scientology so much, he might not want to join the orgs.
If he would say that he is L. Ron Hubbard, they would call security and route him out.
Also be reminded that the German secret service allowed his doppelganger to live two years longer.
The real L. Ron Hubbard was killed and born before 1986. They did this deliberately because those in the orgs can now say that it can't be him as he was born before "LRH" died in San Obsispo county.
> >> DM is not the heir of Scientology. If L. Ron Hubbard would come back, > >> he would say that DM took SCN over without his permission.
> >> If L. Ron Hubbard would enter any Scientology org today, saying that > >> he is back, they would route him out with security.
> >> Scientology orgs are now like Christian churches, saying waiting for > >> Jesus but who would routed in a mental institution if entering a > >> Christian church and having the guts to state it.
> >> This planet is so dumb!
> >> Barbara Schwarz
> >> ========================================
> >> [REPLY]
> >> No, Barbara, you're the dumb one. The size of your ego is only exceeded > >> by > >> the size of your feet.
> >> Unlike the lies and phony teaching in Scientology, Christianity is based > >> upon a factual man who is the Son of God who really lived and who really > >> did > >> the things He said He was going to do. Jesus told us while He was yet > >> alive > >> that he would be crucified, die and then come back to life on the third > >> day - and He did just that.
> >> Where is your precious Hubbard who seems to have claimed he would be > >> coming > >> back in another body? Huh, huh? I can't hear you, Barbara. What a fraud > >> he > >> turned out to be. . .
> >> The only dumb people are those who are so dumb or so arrogant that they > >> refuse to believe historical fact and believe in quacks instead.
> >> By their deeds shall they be known. If Jesus were to come back today, all > >> He > >> would have to do is one small miracle and that would be proof that He > >> really > >> was who He said He was. God does miracles - nobody else. Jesus is God.
> > i dont mean to antagonize, but there are reasonable doubts among > > historians (non-religious ones) about the factual existance of Jesus since > > the "New Testiment" is the ONLY record of his existence and can hardly be > > called impartial. Beyond that there is NO evidence of his existence - the > > Shroud of Turin was found to be much younger than Jesus (by more than a > > 1000 years ) And that Bible its self has been used by Christian cults to > > control people ever since through editing, omission and mistranslation. > > The historic Jesus, if there ever was one, is lost to history. As is any > > reliable record of what he actually did that wasnt rewritten by popes and > > kings. I'm really uncomfortable with discussions of "my cult can beat up > > your cult" it makes both sides look like propagandists and does little to > > help with lasting dissemination efforts or either side.
> > Why not just draw distinctions between the two... like pointing out the > > values of Christianity that are universal to all - not just people in the > > Christian bubble - and point out where the cult of Scientology fails to > > uphold such UNIVERSAL truths. You get a two-for in that on one hand you > > refute the erroneous teachings and philosophy of Sientology while > > strengthening your position by not coming across as pushing your religion > > in an offensive way. It makes Christianity look good while making > > Scientology look bad. If you just push your trip down another person's > > throat, you just turn them off and likely prevent them from ever possibly > > becomming a Christian in the future. And then - from your point of view - > > you are partly responsible for that persons suffering that comes from a > > non-Christian life because you pushed them away.
> > There's a fine line between effective dissemination and bully > > prosteletizing (sp?) that can often be the difference between someone > > joining or not.
> > -again I don't mean to belittle your position, I respect your religion and > > your right to practice and spread it. I just don't share your faith. - I > > feel, however that I must clarify that I have great respect for the figure > > of Jesus as a teacher. Whether he actually lived or not is rather beside > > the point since the teachings endure regardless and would continue to > > inspire folks such as yourself to live better lives. And that is never a > > bad thing.
> You should read "Mere Christianity" by C.S. Lewis who was an agnostic before > he turned Christian. He makes a very valid argument of how and why it is > insulting to claim Jesus was only a 'teacher.' He also makes a very good > argument for the historical accuracy of the life and times of Jesus Christ - > a real man and a real historical figure.
> Historical records have a long and accurate record never having been written > down on paper. Such records have a long tradition of being passed orally > from generation to generation with great accuracy. In Jesus Christ's case, > it is generally believed that his history was written down within 200 or so > years of his life. This is only four generations and great accuracy can be > assumed due to the relatively short period of oral transmission of that > history.
> -- > Gregory Hall- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
The value of any book depends on the tone level of the reader. In fact the very meaning of a book depends on such.
> > DM is not the heir of Scientology. If L. Ron Hubbard would come back, > > he would say that DM took SCN over without his permission.
> > If L. Ron Hubbard would enter any Scientology org today, saying that > > he is back, they would route him out with security.
> > Scientology orgs are now like Christian churches, saying waiting for > > Jesus but who would routed in a mental institution if entering a > > Christian church and having the guts to state it.
> > This planet is so dumb!
> > Barbara Schwarz
> > ========================================
> > [REPLY]
> > No, Barbara, you're the dumb one. The size of your ego is only exceeded by > > the size of your feet.
> > Unlike the lies and phony teaching in Scientology, Christianity is based > > upon a factual man who is the Son of God who really lived and who really did > > the things He said He was going to do. Jesus told us while He was yet alive > > that he would be crucified, die and then come back to life on the third > > day - and He did just that.
> > Where is your precious Hubbard who seems to have claimed he would be coming > > back in another body? Huh, huh? I can't hear you, Barbara. What a fraud he > > turned out to be. . .
> > The only dumb people are those who are so dumb or so arrogant that they > > refuse to believe historical fact and believe in quacks instead.
> > By their deeds shall they be known. If Jesus were to come back today, all He > > would have to do is one small miracle and that would be proof that He really > > was who He said He was. God does miracles - nobody else. Jesus is God.
> i dont mean to antagonize, but there are reasonable doubts among > historians (non-religious ones) about the factual existance of Jesus > since the "New Testiment" is the ONLY record of his existence and can > hardly be called impartial. Beyond that there is NO evidence of his > existence - the Shroud of Turin was found to be much younger than Jesus > (by more than a 1000 years ) And that Bible its self has been used by > Christian cults to control people ever since through editing, omission > and mistranslation. The historic Jesus, if there ever was one, is lost > to history. As is any reliable record of what he actually did that > wasnt rewritten by popes and kings. I'm really uncomfortable with > discussions of "my cult can beat up your cult" it makes both sides look > like propagandists and does little to help with lasting dissemination > efforts or either side.
> Why not just draw distinctions between the two... like pointing out the > values of Christianity that are universal to all - not just people in > the Christian bubble - and point out where the cult of Scientology > fails to uphold such UNIVERSAL truths. You get a two-for in that on one > hand you refute the erroneous teachings and philosophy of Sientology > while strengthening your position by not coming across as pushing your > religion in an offensive way. It makes Christianity look good while > making Scientology look bad. If you just push your trip down another > person's throat, you just turn them off and likely prevent them from > ever possibly becomming a Christian in the future. And then - from your > point of view - you are partly responsible for that persons suffering > that comes from a non-Christian life because you pushed them away.
> There's a fine line between effective dissemination and bully > prosteletizing (sp?) that can often be the difference between someone > joining or not.
> -again I don't mean to belittle your position, I respect your religion > and your right to practice and spread it. I just don't share your > faith. - I feel, however that I must clarify that I have great respect > for the figure of Jesus as a teacher. Whether he actually lived or not > is rather beside the point since the teachings endure regardless and > would continue to inspire folks such as yourself to live better lives. > And that is never a bad thing.- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
Christianity is a mystery sandwhich, in my opinion. If there is a way to find and keep a christianity that is truthful about what I think I know about the nature of concious existence, I have been unable to find such. Its the "keep" part that makes it fall down. The abrahamic are mostly against increases in individual awareness that are the basis of pretty much every other religion on earth, but especially the eastern 1s. Essentially, I think that dualistic monotheism is satanic.
> > > DM is not the heir of Scientology. If L. Ron Hubbard would come back, > > > he would say that DM took SCN over without his permission.
> > > If L. Ron Hubbard would enter any Scientology org today, saying that > > > he is back, they would route him out with security.
> > > Scientology orgs are now like Christian churches, saying waiting for > > > Jesus but who would routed in a mental institution if entering a > > > Christian church and having the guts to state it.
> > > This planet is so dumb!
> > > Barbara Schwarz
> > > ========================================
> > > [REPLY]
> > > No, Barbara, you're the dumb one. The size of your ego is only exceeded by > > > the size of your feet.
> > > Unlike the lies and phony teaching in Scientology, Christianity is based > > > upon a factual man who is the Son of God who really lived and who really did > > > the things He said He was going to do. Jesus told us while He was yet alive > > > that he would be crucified, die and then come back to life on the third > > > day - and He did just that.
> > > Where is your precious Hubbard who seems to have claimed he would be coming > > > back in another body? Huh, huh? I can't hear you, Barbara. What a fraud he > > > turned out to be. . .
> > > The only dumb people are those who are so dumb or so arrogant that they > > > refuse to believe historical fact and believe in quacks instead.
> > > By their deeds shall they be known. If Jesus were to come back today, all He > > > would have to do is one small miracle and that would be proof that He really > > > was who He said He was. God does miracles - nobody else. Jesus is God.
> > i dont mean to antagonize, but there are reasonable doubts among > > historians (non-religious ones) about the factual existance of Jesus > > since the "New Testiment" is the ONLY record of his existence and can > > hardly be called impartial. Beyond that there is NO evidence of his > > existence - the Shroud of Turin was found to be much younger than Jesus > > (by more than a 1000 years ) And that Bible its self has been used by > > Christian cults to control people ever since through editing, omission > > and mistranslation. The historic Jesus, if there ever was one, is lost > > to history. As is any reliable record of what he actually did that > > wasnt rewritten by popes and kings. I'm really uncomfortable with > > discussions of "my cult can beat up your cult" it makes both sides look > > like propagandists and does little to help with lasting dissemination > > efforts or either side.
> > Why not just draw distinctions between the two... like pointing out the > > values of Christianity that are universal to all - not just people in > > the Christian bubble - and point out where the cult of Scientology > > fails to uphold such UNIVERSAL truths. You get a two-for in that on one > > hand you refute the erroneous teachings and philosophy of Sientology > > while strengthening your position by not coming across as pushing your > > religion in an offensive way. It makes Christianity look good while > > making Scientology look bad. If you just push your trip down another > > person's throat, you just turn them off and likely prevent them from > > ever possibly becomming a Christian in the future. And then - from your > > point of view - you are partly responsible for that persons suffering > > that comes from a non-Christian life because you pushed them away.
> > There's a fine line between effective dissemination and bully > > prosteletizing (sp?) that can often be the difference between someone > > joining or not.
> > -again I don't mean to belittle your position, I respect your religion > > and your right to practice and spread it. I just don't share your > > faith. - I feel, however that I must clarify that I have great respect > > for the figure of Jesus as a teacher. Whether he actually lived or not > > is rather beside the point since the teachings endure regardless and > > would continue to inspire folks such as yourself to live better lives. > > And that is never a bad thing.- Hide quoted text -
> > - Show quoted text -
> Christianity is a mystery sandwhich, in my opinion. If there is a way > to find and keep a christianity that is truthful about what I think I > know about the nature of concious existence, I have been unable to > find such. Its the "keep" part that makes it fall down. The > abrahamic are mostly against increases in individual awareness that > are the basis of pretty much every other religion on earth, but > especially the eastern 1s. Essentially, I think that dualistic > monotheism is satanic.- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
Has anyone else noticed that Psycobarbie gets more anti male the more crazy she gets?
Sometimes.. in her saner moments she sounds like quite a pleasant soul. Right now she is acting psycotic and also sounds like a feminist. It si surprising how often these two things are found together.
> On Nov 4, 12:17 am, Richard Ford <doorman.f...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > It
> L. Ron Hubbard was kidnapped to Germany and given to a German family > just as they did with me. His memory was stolen just as they stole > mine.
> As the German secret service altered Scientology so much, he might not > want to join the orgs.
> If he would say that he is L. Ron Hubbard, they would call security > and route him out.
> Also be reminded that the German secret service allowed his > doppelganger to live two years longer.
> The real L. Ron Hubbard was killed and born before 1986. They did this > deliberately because those in the orgs can now say that it can't be > him as he was born before "LRH" died in San Obsispo county.
> >> DM is not the heir of Scientology. If L. Ron Hubbard would come back, > >> he would say that DM took SCN over without his permission.
> >> If L. Ron Hubbard would enter any Scientology org today, saying that > >> he is back, they would route him out with security.
> >> Scientology orgs are now like Christian churches, saying waiting for > >> Jesus but who would routed in a mental institution if entering a > >> Christian church and having the guts to state it.
> >> This planet is so dumb!
> >> Barbara Schwarz
> >> ========================================
> >> [REPLY]
> >> No, Barbara, you're the dumb one. The size of your ego is only exceeded > >> by > >> the size of your feet.
> >> Unlike the lies and phony teaching in Scientology, Christianity is > >> based > >> upon a factual man who is the Son of God who really lived and who > >> really > >> did > >> the things He said He was going to do. Jesus told us while He was yet > >> alive > >> that he would be crucified, die and then come back to life on the third > >> day - and He did just that.
> >> Where is your precious Hubbard who seems to have claimed he would be > >> coming > >> back in another body? Huh, huh? I can't hear you, Barbara. What a fraud > >> he > >> turned out to be. . .
> >> The only dumb people are those who are so dumb or so arrogant that they > >> refuse to believe historical fact and believe in quacks instead.
> >> By their deeds shall they be known. If Jesus were to come back today, > >> all > >> He > >> would have to do is one small miracle and that would be proof that He > >> really > >> was who He said He was. God does miracles - nobody else. Jesus is God.
> > i dont mean to antagonize, but there are reasonable doubts among > > historians (non-religious ones) about the factual existance of Jesus > > since > > the "New Testiment" is the ONLY record of his existence and can hardly > > be > > called impartial. Beyond that there is NO evidence of his existence - > > the > > Shroud of Turin was found to be much younger than Jesus (by more than a > > 1000 years ) And that Bible its self has been used by Christian cults to > > control people ever since through editing, omission and mistranslation. > > The historic Jesus, if there ever was one, is lost to history. As is any > > reliable record of what he actually did that wasnt rewritten by popes > > and > > kings. I'm really uncomfortable with discussions of "my cult can beat up > > your cult" it makes both sides look like propagandists and does little > > to > > help with lasting dissemination efforts or either side.
> > Why not just draw distinctions between the two... like pointing out the > > values of Christianity that are universal to all - not just people in > > the > > Christian bubble - and point out where the cult of Scientology fails to > > uphold such UNIVERSAL truths. You get a two-for in that on one hand you > > refute the erroneous teachings and philosophy of Sientology while > > strengthening your position by not coming across as pushing your > > religion > > in an offensive way. It makes Christianity look good while making > > Scientology look bad. If you just push your trip down another person's > > throat, you just turn them off and likely prevent them from ever > > possibly > > becomming a Christian in the future. And then - from your point of > > view - > > you are partly responsible for that persons suffering that comes from a > > non-Christian life because you pushed them away.
> > There's a fine line between effective dissemination and bully > > prosteletizing (sp?) that can often be the difference between someone > > joining or not.
> > -again I don't mean to belittle your position, I respect your religion > > and > > your right to practice and spread it. I just don't share your faith. - I > > feel, however that I must clarify that I have great respect for the > > figure > > of Jesus as a teacher. Whether he actually lived or not is rather beside > > the point since the teachings endure regardless and would continue to > > inspire folks such as yourself to live better lives. And that is never a > > bad thing.
> You should read "Mere Christianity" by C.S. Lewis who was an agnostic > before > he turned Christian. He makes a very valid argument of how and why it is > insulting to claim Jesus was only a 'teacher.' He also makes a very good > argument for the historical accuracy of the life and times of Jesus > Christ - > a real man and a real historical figure.
> Historical records have a long and accurate record never having been > written > down on paper. Such records have a long tradition of being passed orally > from generation to generation with great accuracy. In Jesus Christ's case, > it is generally believed that his history was written down within 200 or > so > years of his life. This is only four generations and great accuracy can be > assumed due to the relatively short period of oral transmission of that > history.
:: :: The value of any book depends on the tone level of the reader. In :: fact the very meaning of a book depends on such. ::
That's probably why Barbara Schwarz doesn't understand what she reads and when she does manage to understand something she is unable to reply because of her total, self-imposed ignorance. So, because of her very low tone which borders on the primitive, she never has been able to prove any of her many lies.
Her latest gambit is to act all offended and she says she's not going to answer any questions or claims because the person asking them is too primitive. This while she demonstrates she is more primitive than anybody. She sure knows how to showcase the worst of Scientology.
> > > DM is not the heir of Scientology. If L. Ron Hubbard would come back, > > > he would say that DM took SCN over without his permission.
> > > If L. Ron Hubbard would enter any Scientology org today, saying that > > > he is back, they would route him out with security.
> > > Scientology orgs are now like Christian churches, saying waiting for > > > Jesus but who would routed in a mental institution if entering a > > > Christian church and having the guts to state it.
> > > This planet is so dumb!
> > > Barbara Schwarz
> > > ========================================
> > > [REPLY]
> > > No, Barbara, you're the dumb one. The size of your ego is only > > > exceeded by > > > the size of your feet.
> > > Unlike the lies and phony teaching in Scientology, Christianity is > > > based > > > upon a factual man who is the Son of God who really lived and who > > > really did > > > the things He said He was going to do. Jesus told us while He was yet > > > alive > > > that he would be crucified, die and then come back to life on the > > > third > > > day - and He did just that.
> > > Where is your precious Hubbard who seems to have claimed he would be > > > coming > > > back in another body? Huh, huh? I can't hear you, Barbara. What a > > > fraud he > > > turned out to be. . .
> > > The only dumb people are those who are so dumb or so arrogant that > > > they > > > refuse to believe historical fact and believe in quacks instead.
> > > By their deeds shall they be known. If Jesus were to come back today, > > > all He > > > would have to do is one small miracle and that would be proof that He > > > really > > > was who He said He was. God does miracles - nobody else. Jesus is God.
> > i dont mean to antagonize, but there are reasonable doubts among > > historians (non-religious ones) about the factual existance of Jesus > > since the "New Testiment" is the ONLY record of his existence and can > > hardly be called impartial. Beyond that there is NO evidence of his > > existence - the Shroud of Turin was found to be much younger than Jesus > > (by more than a 1000 years ) And that Bible its self has been used by > > Christian cults to control people ever since through editing, omission > > and mistranslation. The historic Jesus, if there ever was one, is lost > > to history. As is any reliable record of what he actually did that > > wasnt rewritten by popes and kings. I'm really uncomfortable with > > discussions of "my cult can beat up your cult" it makes both sides look > > like propagandists and does little to help with lasting dissemination > > efforts or either side.
> > Why not just draw distinctions between the two... like pointing out the > > values of Christianity that are universal to all - not just people in > > the Christian bubble - and point out where the cult of Scientology > > fails to uphold such UNIVERSAL truths. You get a two-for in that on one > > hand you refute the erroneous teachings and philosophy of Sientology > > while strengthening your position by not coming across as pushing your > > religion in an offensive way. It makes Christianity look good while > > making Scientology look bad. If you just push your trip down another > > person's throat, you just turn them off and likely prevent them from > > ever possibly becomming a Christian in the future. And then - from your > > point of view - you are partly responsible for that persons suffering > > that comes from a non-Christian life because you pushed them away.
> > There's a fine line between effective dissemination and bully > > prosteletizing (sp?) that can often be the difference between someone > > joining or not.
> > -again I don't mean to belittle your position, I respect your religion > > and your right to practice and spread it. I just don't share your > > faith. - I feel, however that I must clarify that I have great respect > > for the figure of Jesus as a teacher. Whether he actually lived or not > > is rather beside the point since the teachings endure regardless and > > would continue to inspire folks such as yourself to live better lives. > > And that is never a bad thing.- Hide quoted text -
> > - Show quoted text -
> Christianity is a mystery sandwhich, in my opinion. If there is a way > to find and keep a christianity that is truthful about what I think I > know about the nature of concious existence, I have been unable to > find such. Its the "keep" part that makes it fall down. The > abrahamic are mostly against increases in individual awareness that > are the basis of pretty much every other religion on earth, but > especially the eastern 1s. Essentially, I think that dualistic > monotheism is satanic
:: Has anyone else noticed that Psycobarbie gets more anti male the more ::crazy she gets?
She has a phobia of men. I don't know what caused it but she's such a misandrist that it's pitiful. She has even made up an "original Marty" to protect herself from any advances from real, existing men. She's probably the most insecure woman concerning her womanhood of any woman in the world.
:: Sometimes.. in her saner moments she sounds like quite a pleasant :: soul. Right now she is acting psycotic and also sounds like a :: feminist. It is surprising how often these two things are found :: together.
Like I said, Barbara Schwarz is a FemiNazi and a misandrist. She really needs counseling. Of course Scientology wants members to be crazy so they can be better taken advantage of. Of course Scientology finds it easier to extract money from people they cause to go crazy. Why would Scientology want members to be mentally healthy? So they could decide for themselves how badly they have been taken advantage of? I don't think so.
|
